You are absolutely right Dr.Wayne. What would have been the destiny of man if pattent laws where in force in the present form a thousand years before!
Anil On Sep 18, 4:24 am, Wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah Leigh, I don't get either :-( > > I would love to hear the rationales from these leading OER advocates who > publish works on the topic of OER under a ND license. > > Over the last year I have received two invitations to publish research > articles/chapters in special editions dealing with the topic of OER. My > standard question is what license will you publish your special edition > under? Typically the license does not meet the requirements of the free > cultural works definition and then I humbly decline to publish under > their restrictive licensing regimes. That's freedom of choice. > > I'll leave the NC restriction aside here as there is divided opinion on > this and my personal views are well documented in this forum. However, I > just don't get the ND restriction applied to research output focused on > promoting OER. Lets take an absurd example -- What if one of these > publications cites work from WikiEducator which is licensed under > CC-BY-SA. Sure, under fair usage/fair dealing a publication could lock > down a CC-BY-SA citation under ND. > > But where is the ethic? The ethic of research is to acknowledge your > sources --- does this ethic extend to respecting the intentions of the > original creator? If an author releases content under a copyleft / > sharealike requirement - is there an ethical obligation to ensure that > the "derivative" work is released under the same licence. > Hypothetically, if an OER work is published under a CC-BY-NC-ND license > and uses extensive material from a CC-BY-SA source -- would this be a > transgression of research ethic? Similarly the ethic of research is to > acknowledge your sources. At conceptual level the majority of research > are derivative works based on the ideas of those who have gone before > us. Given this ethic -- I don't see the rationale behind the ND > restriction. > > In the case of a cultural work, for example a digital painting -- I > understand the ethic of applying a ND restriction because the digital > artwork is the expression of the artist and the prime purpose of the > creation. > > >From a sociological perspective -- I don't think licenses should be used > > to regulate intent, but that's another discussion. > > Those of us working on the OER arena have lots to think about. After > all, the purpose of education is to share knowledge freely. > > Cheers > Wayne > > > > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 10:29 +1200, Leigh Blackall wrote: > > MIT keep missing the issue with their licenses! > >http://mitpress.mit.edu/opening_up_education/ > > > -- > > -- > > Leigh Blackall > > +64... > > skype - leigh_blackall > > SL - Leroy Goalpost > >http://learnonline.wordpress.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
